Hey Phil, enjoyed the video as usual. At the 43 min mark, I was somewhat surprised when you folded KK55 with a backdoor flush draw vs Theo's c-bet on 982...seemed like a jam would have been better? Can you please explain your thoughts here. Thank you.
If we put together a reasonable 3-betting range, we're doing pretty terribly against it. We have very little equity against AAxx, which makes up a large-ish part of his 3-bet range, and all of his JT98, QJT8 type hands have flopped really well too.
Holding two Kings hurts us a little bit too because we block part of his range that we are doing okay against (AKQT type hands).
At 2 min I think I'm just shoving 96s cos it's slightly +EV, and at least in theory I would like to minraise a hand like 97o there cos it would be slightly -EV to shove.
But then again what you said about minraising having an even bigger expectation might be true. Haven't done that much research about this.
Edit: Didn't see it was a Super Knockout. I would fold in a Super KO. But an interesting situation nonetheless.
the 20bb open shove, 3 bet call w 55 v your ep open etc are all most likely b/c its a super knockout, which you didn't really mention (at least in first 20 mins). You have an amazing overlay when you cover people early in the tourney.
Yeah, watching this back, I'm not sure why I didn't mention it (or maybe even think about it?). I may have been too focused on the $2k PLO and just didn't care much about the tournament... Something I tend to do until I'm a little deeper, as was evident by my QTT9 play in the $200 PLO event.
There's a decent chance that I thought it was a regular knockout tourney and that the bounties were not as big a deal. The SCOOPs had me really messed up w/ sleeping.
Well you could make an argument that taking a small -cEV play in the 215$ scoop with huge variance/chance to build a huge stack is ultimately +$EV for Phil because A) He will get a lot of new +cEV spots with his new found huge stack and B) a 215$ is so low compared to what he plays that he gains hourly by adding a bigger table instead.
So I guess what I'm saying is that the way the EV is distributed (bust or gain huge stack) might be more important than the exact EV of the spot, to certain extent.
Exactly what kaytor said. I would rather add more valuable tables. Once I build a large stack in a PLO tourney my EV gets very high, but grinding a short stack in a smaller tourney isn't a good use of that mental energy compared to other places I can put it.
Almost everyone plays higher variance/slightly minus ev early on in tournaments, when they play much lower stakes than they are used to. So it defiantly makes sense to check what other tournaments your opponent is playing, or his normal stakes, and adjust to it. (I find this to especially to be relevant for the "red" tournaments on stars)
I suspect that many players are also doing it unconsciously. It is just human nature to gamble more, when you play much lower than you normally play.
Hey Phil could you possible tell more about your color codes? I know your saying its abstract but then maybe you could make a whole video about it! It could be a huge help for me... Im actually gonna be a bit disapointed if u not wanna talk about it when i pay so Much money Being a loyal member :)
Moss, I'm not quite sure how this could be a huge help for you. Everyone uses their own system for color coding, and I think mine is a lot worse than most.
I don't discuss them much for a couple of reasons. One is that they really are abstract and somewhat random (and they evolve and change over time). The second is that I don't want to offend anybody.
An example (of both of these reasons) - one of my colors means 'dumb'. It's not a color for fish... mostly pros, many who win and who don't play badly... just that I have seen hands played that show some kind of clearly poor logic.
I have three colors that mean 'tight', but each are slightly different kinds of tight. I don't even know if I could put it into words. I guess one is more about preflop tightness, the other is just more of a good TAG, and a third is weak-tight and slightly bad? Even that isn't entirely accurate.
The reason it could be a help is that im Kinda new to hem2, and i see all these regs have color codes. But as your are saying their mostly like TAG, LAG fish etc. And i dont really find this useful bc my HUD is pretty Much telling me that. I just thought if you had some sophisticated notes on a specific pláy style it would make decisions lot easier in MTTs.. I respect you dont wanna Call people out, but it could be done in a anonymous Way! But i guess i Will just start figure it out slowly and experiment a little bit
This feels similar to asking someone for their HUD. As someone who has been asked that question numerous times I'm going to tell you the same thing that I tell anyone who wants someone else's HUD.
You may think it's going to help you, but it's not.
The reason you think it's going to help you is because you can sit here and watch someone who is familiar with the system use it to help him and you want that to be you.
The problem is, as soon as the information is provided to you you aren't going to know how to use it.
As a result it's not useful to use someone else's HUD.
What I always tell people is that when they get into a spot that is fairly frequent and they say to themselves "I wish I knew how often or with what range villain did this" then you should go and dig up stats to tell you and add them in.
In this way you create a HUD that you actually use and is helpful to you specifically.
For example: I play mostly 500-1k NL so I play against a lot of villain's that limp the sb. As a result I have stats in my HUD that are geared towards that aspect of the game. If a 50 NL player were to use my HUD that entire line would be completely wasted.
You should do the same thing here.
When you are playing and you face a villain try to categorize him based on some sort of general aspect of his game that is relevant to your stakes.(he's aggressive, he's not aggressive, he folds to too many cbet, he doesn't fold enough to cbets etc...
The two most frequent zoom PLO games on stars are 10/20 and 25/50 (that phil would bother playing).
What if Phils brown color means "Only plays up to 10/20" and his blue color means "only plays 25/50" and his other color means "plays up to 200/400". In this instance you'd just have a table full of brown players every time at whatever stake you play.
Similarly, if it's a function of some aspect of their game it's pretty likely that if you tried to copy it, every single player you played against would fall under multiple categories of "has this leak" and it would once again be very useless.
I personally just color code based on number of tables played at zoom. This gives me an okay idea of how tough I expect any given table to be at a quick glance. I'd recommend trying something like that first.
You mentioned that you are pretty much potting (or 3x) because you want to induce variance. However, would you have done the same thing if this were a freezeout tourney? About a year ago I watched your scoop plo mtt vid (where you chopped 3-way at FT iirc), and there you were just min raising the whole time.. but that's during the mid- and late-stage of the tourney so different arguments could be made, I guess.
Also, although this hasn't been yet covered in this series (I'm sure it will be later on), do you think it would be a good adjustment to resteal a TON more in plo tourney compared to cash, especially later in the tourney? I have a feeling that this is where we can make lots of money because they tend to overfold to 3bets (well, it's a tournament) and we are rarely in a very bad shape once called, but I don't have a meaningful sample to experiment with this idea yet.
Again, thanks for doing this series! Sorry there isn't any screenshot, it wasn't called for this time. :P
39:00 table 3; KQ45; I agree turn checking>betting however I'd consider betting river. I know it would be odd turning top2 into a bluff (with no spade blocker as well) but we are actually somewhat near the bottom of range on that runout. Additionally, the turn is so draw heavy that he should be leading all his turned straights, and river Id expect him to lead flushes the majority of time. We should get credit for flush if he doesnt have one given we have 2pr minimum on that runout nearly 100%. It might be an exploitive play but it looks > than checking back imo to fold him off sets and chops.
36:00 Table 1 9975 on J83ss; I think your reasoning and line are solid in cash game i.e. deeper stacks but here the hand starts with just over 30bb and he can be value raising any J7xx comfortably, even J389, J3t9, J3:ss etc. And id have to disagree that he will take a turn with J7; I think at that SPR and that wetness of flop he ships a lot. Id prob b/f>b/c>b/3b/f just given the wider array of hands at that stack that can jam.
Thanks for a great video and looking forward to the SCOOP series. At 52:40 can you explain the flop c/r on bottom-left? What value hands do we credibly rep as a PFR/call in SB vs BB and what better hands is he folding (do we think he has enough with AKJx / folds crappy AAxx?)
Loading 21 Comments...
Hey Phil, enjoyed the video as usual. At the 43 min mark, I was somewhat surprised when you folded KK55 with a backdoor flush draw vs Theo's c-bet on 982...seemed like a jam would have been better? Can you please explain your thoughts here. Thank you.
Thanks, man! I only drink Iced Coffee, btw.
If we put together a reasonable 3-betting range, we're doing pretty terribly against it. We have very little equity against AAxx, which makes up a large-ish part of his 3-bet range, and all of his JT98, QJT8 type hands have flopped really well too.
Holding two Kings hurts us a little bit too because we block part of his range that we are doing okay against (AKQT type hands).
At 2 min I think I'm just shoving 96s cos it's slightly +EV, and at least in theory I would like to minraise a hand like 97o there cos it would be slightly -EV to shove.
But then again what you said about minraising having an even bigger expectation might be true. Haven't done that much research about this.
Edit: Didn't see it was a Super Knockout. I would fold in a Super KO. But an interesting situation nonetheless.
the 20bb open shove, 3 bet call w 55 v your ep open etc are all most likely b/c its a super knockout, which you didn't really mention (at least in first 20 mins). You have an amazing overlay when you cover people early in the tourney.
Yeah, watching this back, I'm not sure why I didn't mention it (or maybe even think about it?). I may have been too focused on the $2k PLO and just didn't care much about the tournament... Something I tend to do until I'm a little deeper, as was evident by my QTT9 play in the $200 PLO event.
There's a decent chance that I thought it was a regular knockout tourney and that the bounties were not as big a deal. The SCOOPs had me really messed up w/ sleeping.
Poor Johan. Rose through the ranks, still no respect.
making -ev plays cos its a smallstakestourney. ok thx. noted
Well you could make an argument that taking a small -cEV play in the 215$ scoop with huge variance/chance to build a huge stack is ultimately +$EV for Phil because A) He will get a lot of new +cEV spots with his new found huge stack and B) a 215$ is so low compared to what he plays that he gains hourly by adding a bigger table instead.
So I guess what I'm saying is that the way the EV is distributed (bust or gain huge stack) might be more important than the exact EV of the spot, to certain extent.
And still not sure its a -EV play anyway.
Exactly what kaytor said. I would rather add more valuable tables. Once I build a large stack in a PLO tourney my EV gets very high, but grinding a short stack in a smaller tourney isn't a good use of that mental energy compared to other places I can put it.
Almost everyone plays higher variance/slightly minus ev early on in tournaments, when they play much lower stakes than they are used to. So it defiantly makes sense to check what other tournaments your opponent is playing, or his normal stakes, and adjust to it. (I find this to especially to be relevant for the "red" tournaments on stars)
I suspect that many players are also doing it unconsciously. It is just human nature to gamble more, when you play much lower than you normally play.
Hey Phil could you possible tell more about your color codes? I know your saying its abstract but then maybe you could make a whole video about it! It could be a huge help for me... Im actually gonna be a bit disapointed if u not wanna talk about it when i pay so Much money Being a loyal member :)
Moss, I'm not quite sure how this could be a huge help for you. Everyone uses their own system for color coding, and I think mine is a lot worse than most.
I don't discuss them much for a couple of reasons. One is that they really are abstract and somewhat random (and they evolve and change over time). The second is that I don't want to offend anybody.
An example (of both of these reasons) - one of my colors means 'dumb'. It's not a color for fish... mostly pros, many who win and who don't play badly... just that I have seen hands played that show some kind of clearly poor logic.
I have three colors that mean 'tight', but each are slightly different kinds of tight. I don't even know if I could put it into words. I guess one is more about preflop tightness, the other is just more of a good TAG, and a third is weak-tight and slightly bad? Even that isn't entirely accurate.
The reason it could be a help is that im Kinda new to hem2, and i see all these regs have color codes. But as your are saying their mostly like TAG, LAG fish etc. And i dont really find this useful bc my HUD is pretty Much telling me that. I just thought if you had some sophisticated notes on a specific pláy style it would make decisions lot easier in MTTs.. I respect you dont wanna Call people out, but it could be done in a anonymous Way! But i guess i Will just start figure it out slowly and experiment a little bit
Moss,
This feels similar to asking someone for their HUD. As someone who has been asked that question numerous times I'm going to tell you the same thing that I tell anyone who wants someone else's HUD.
You may think it's going to help you, but it's not.
The reason you think it's going to help you is because you can sit here and watch someone who is familiar with the system use it to help him and you want that to be you.
The problem is, as soon as the information is provided to you you aren't going to know how to use it.
As a result it's not useful to use someone else's HUD.
What I always tell people is that when they get into a spot that is fairly frequent and they say to themselves "I wish I knew how often or with what range villain did this" then you should go and dig up stats to tell you and add them in.
In this way you create a HUD that you actually use and is helpful to you specifically.
For example: I play mostly 500-1k NL so I play against a lot of villain's that limp the sb. As a result I have stats in my HUD that are geared towards that aspect of the game. If a 50 NL player were to use my HUD that entire line would be completely wasted.
You should do the same thing here.
When you are playing and you face a villain try to categorize him based on some sort of general aspect of his game that is relevant to your stakes.(he's aggressive, he's not aggressive, he folds to too many cbet, he doesn't fold enough to cbets etc...
The two most frequent zoom PLO games on stars are 10/20 and 25/50 (that phil would bother playing).
What if Phils brown color means "Only plays up to 10/20" and his blue color means "only plays 25/50" and his other color means "plays up to 200/400". In this instance you'd just have a table full of brown players every time at whatever stake you play.
Similarly, if it's a function of some aspect of their game it's pretty likely that if you tried to copy it, every single player you played against would fall under multiple categories of "has this leak" and it would once again be very useless.
I personally just color code based on number of tables played at zoom. This gives me an okay idea of how tough I expect any given table to be at a quick glance. I'd recommend trying something like that first.
Very nice to see this vid, Phil.
You mentioned that you are pretty much potting (or 3x) because you want to induce variance. However, would you have done the same thing if this were a freezeout tourney? About a year ago I watched your scoop plo mtt vid (where you chopped 3-way at FT iirc), and there you were just min raising the whole time.. but that's during the mid- and late-stage of the tourney so different arguments could be made, I guess.
Also, although this hasn't been yet covered in this series (I'm sure it will be later on), do you think it would be a good adjustment to resteal a TON more in plo tourney compared to cash, especially later in the tourney? I have a feeling that this is where we can make lots of money because they tend to overfold to 3bets (well, it's a tournament) and we are rarely in a very bad shape once called, but I don't have a meaningful sample to experiment with this idea yet.
Again, thanks for doing this series! Sorry there isn't any screenshot, it wasn't called for this time. :P
Not sure I wanna give away spoilers :)
But yes, once the re-entry period is over, and as the tournament goes on, you'll see that reducing variance is central to my gameplan.
39:00 table 3; KQ45; I agree turn checking>betting however I'd consider betting river. I know it would be odd turning top2 into a bluff (with no spade blocker as well) but we are actually somewhat near the bottom of range on that runout. Additionally, the turn is so draw heavy that he should be leading all his turned straights, and river Id expect him to lead flushes the majority of time. We should get credit for flush if he doesnt have one given we have 2pr minimum on that runout nearly 100%. It might be an exploitive play but it looks > than checking back imo to fold him off sets and chops.
36:00 Table 1 9975 on J83ss; I think your reasoning and line are solid in cash game i.e. deeper stacks but here the hand starts with just over 30bb and he can be value raising any J7xx comfortably, even J389, J3t9, J3:ss etc. And id have to disagree that he will take a turn with J7; I think at that SPR and that wetness of flop he ships a lot. Id prob b/f>b/c>b/3b/f just given the wider array of hands at that stack that can jam.
It's $30-60, so over 300bbs
Hi Phil,
Thanks for a great video and looking forward to the SCOOP series. At 52:40 can you explain the flop c/r on bottom-left? What value hands do we credibly rep as a PFR/call in SB vs BB and what better hands is he folding (do we think he has enough with AKJx / folds crappy AAxx?)
Hey, Phil. in last hand when you had A1086 - what was your plan if turn card don't give you any draw or if you get 1 pair on turn ?
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.